Summaries of health policy coverage from major news organizations

Amicus Brief Urges High Court To Learn From History Of Laws Written To Protect Women

Professors from around the U.S. filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the upcoming arguments over a Texas abortion law, saying that any regulation written by men that claims to protect women deserves extra scrutiny. On the other side of the case, briefs will flood the Supreme Court this week from women who have regretted their abortions.

The Washington Post:
Laws Written By Men To Protect Women Deserve Scrutiny, Supreme Court Told
History holds a lesson for the Supreme Court, the brief warns: Be skeptical of laws protecting women that are written by men. The nation’s past is littered with such statutes, say the historians who filed the friend-of-the-court brief, and the motives were suspect. The brief is filed by professors from across the country in the court’s upcoming abortion case, Whole Women’s Health v. Hellerstedt. It urges the justices to examine the intent of Texas legislators who say they approved new restrictions on abortion providers as health safeguards for the women undergoing the procedure. (Barnes, 2/7)

USA Today:
Abortion Opponents Urge Supreme Court To Uphold Texas Law
Opponents of abortion took their turn this week telling the Supreme Court how to rule on the biggest abortion case the justices have considered in a generation. Just as professional women, including more than 100 lawyers, flooded the court last month with personal stories of their abortions and subsequent achievements in life, women who regret their abortions and relatives of some who died following procedures urged the justices to see things their way. (Wolf, 2/5)

This is part of the KHN Morning Briefing, a summary of health policy coverage from major news organizations. Sign up for an email subscription.